Evidence Hub

Comprehensive evaluation of the efficacy and safety of different vitamin D combination regimens based on indirect comparisons for children with rickets: a network meta-analysis

Cao Y, Zheng Y, Chen Y, Chen Q, Xia X, Yuan Z, Li H

Frontiers in nutrition, 2026

867 participants

Abstract

Background: Nutritional rickets is a major pediatric bone disorder closely associated with vitamin D deficiency. Clinical practice has gradually shifted from vitamin D monotherapy toward combination regimens aiming to enhance therapeutic efficacy through complementary mechanisms. However, head-to-head evidence comparing different vitamin D-based combinations remains limited, and their relative efficacy and safety rankings are unclear.

Objective: To systematically compare the efficacy and safety of different oral vitamin D-based combination therapies for nutritional rickets in children and to provide evidence-based guidance for clinical decision-making.

Methods: We conducted a systematic search of PubMed, Embase, the Cochrane Library, Web of Science, CNKI, Wanfang, and VIP databases, followed by a Bayesian network meta-analysis. The study protocol was prospectively registered in PROSPERO (CRD420251029274).

Results: Ten randomized controlled trials involving 867 children were included, comparing nine vitamin D-based combination regimens with vitamin D3 monotherapy. Pairwise meta-analyses showed that combination therapies significantly improved serum 25-hydroxyvitamin D levels, reduced bone-specific alkaline phosphatase, and increased serum calcium and phosphate concentrations, without an increased risk of adverse events. Subgroup analyses indicated significantly greater benefits among term infants than preterm infants (P < 0.001). Network meta-analysis revealed distinct…

How strong is the evidence?

Evidence Hub reads this as a meta-analysis, done in people. Its evidence level is 1 of 5 (Highest · pooled evidence). Pooled evidence from several studies sits at the top of the evidence pyramid. Reported size: 867 participants or records.

How the five levels of evidence work. The level is assigned automatically from the abstract and can be wrong, so check the paper.

Read the paper

Related studies

Go deeper in Evidence Hub

Evidence Hub adds a study data sheet (design, sample size, evidence level, key numbers), an AI summary and a chat grounded in the paper's text.

Open this study Sign up free